Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 30
30 CHAPTER 5 Best Practices--Case Study Reports Case studies on the eight selected state DOTs are presented A closer look at Caltrans' roads reveals that 10,821 miles in this chapter. are rural while only 4,413 miles are urban. The rural areas of These case studies are not intended to provide a means of California have only eight percent of the population but com- comparing and contrasting state practices, but rather a forum pose ninety-four percent of the land area. Forty-six percent to showcase and highlight their strengths in program and of the state's roads are located in rural areas. Caltrans recog- project delivery within the context of their environment. nizes that rural issues have different characteristics than urban areas and providing transportation to the remote rural loca- tions is a challenge. The sparse population may require spe- California cial transportation needs when planning and designing for a Performance-Based, Outcome-Driven completely integrated, interconnected system. Furthermore, Results for Program Delivery California's economy relies heavily on moving agricultural products, timber, and tourists through its rural regions via The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) roads, bridges, and rail systems. Issues that affect rural areas has always strived for a collective vision that provides "for the vary depending upon an area's economic base, topography, mobility and accessibility of people, goods, services, and infor- and proximity to urban areas. Part of the concern is that if a mation through an integrated, multimodal network." The goal rural area is located adjacent to an urban area, a "spillover" is to achieve a fully integrated, multimodal, sustainable trans- of big city problems occurs. For instance, the rural area may portation system that supports three outcomes that define experience traffic and air pollution, but not have the funds or quality of life--prosperous economy, quality environment, resources to address these problems (26). and social equity (21). California's state highway system consists of approxi- mately 170,000 miles of public roadways, of which Caltrans California's Economy and Goods Movement operates and maintains 15,269 miles (22). While less than nine Because of California's location on the Pacific Coast, it has percent of the State's roads fall within Caltrans' responsibility, the unique advantage of being a cornerstone in the shipping this transportation system supports the sixth largest economy and receiving of goods via its many ports. This in turn provides in the world due to its rich farmlands, diverse industries, and opportunities for other industries and commerce to benefit motion picture production enterprises. The Golden State is from California's unique location. California's own strength in 158,693 square miles from top to bottom and faces a tremen- being the largest agricultural and food producer in the nation, dous challenge in providing for the growing population (23). with almost $25 billion per year in agricultural output, makes With 36 million people, California is the most populous truck access of particular importance. Timber, food, and agri- state in the country (24). The population is projected to grow cultural industries rely heavily on the trucking industry and to approximately 48.6 million by the year 2025, which rep- the existing transportation system to move and distribute resents a 35 percent increase (25). This growth is expected products not only within California but to other states as well. to occur in urban areas, with increasing elderly and Hispanic The large trucks take a huge toll on the local and state roads populations. Apart from these changing demographics, travel that connect to the interstate system. Pavement conditions, behavior, social trends, and land use changes place a clear along with other factors such as noise, air quality, and safety, demand on the existing infrastructure. are especially impacted by truck traffic.

OCR for page 30
31 VMT on California's roads is 328 billion annually (22). Technology, and Finance. Each of these programs has deputy Beyond the wear and tear of daily vehicles on California's directors who are responsible for managing numerous smaller pavement, the climate imposes an entire set of extreme cir- divisions. For example, Project Delivery has Construction, cumstances which the transportation system must bear. Cold- Design, Engineering Services, Environmental Analysis, Proj- weather freeze­thaw cycles in the north and high-elevation ect Management, and Right-of-Way and Land Surveys Divi- areas, extreme heat conditions near the deserts, earthquakes, sions under its umbrella. The 12 district directors also report and forest fires all have a direct impact on motorists in their to the director. daily commute. Such a great challenge calls for innovative Caltrans' organizational structure is predominantly decen- solutions as California advances and prepares for the next tralized for project delivery because the state is so large and two decades of change. varies greatly in topography, climate, and socio-cultural issues Funding for transportation in California comes from a vari- as one moves from north to south. Urban and rural settings ety of sources such as state, local, private, and federal funds. impact both design and project delivery paths. Design issues State funds consist primarily of the state excise tax on gaso- vary from district to district, as do the cultural groups and line and diesel fuels and truck weight fees. Federal funds con- communities, and each must be dealt with individually. In sist mainly of the federal gasoline and diesel fuel excise taxes. areas where there are large numbers of ethnic or native com- Local funding sources include local sales tax measures, a small munities and/or dense urban populations, an intensive public percentage share of the state general sales tax, and local gen- outreach effort may be required. For rural settings or extreme eral funds (27). climate conditions, design parameters may pose a constraint The current transportation budget allocates $13.7 billion for construction and ultimately project delivery. As such, the in expenditures for Caltrans. The 2008­09 budget provides districts and their project delivery staff provide specialized approximately $6.2 billion for transportation capital out- expertise in understanding the environment, the social fabric, lay, $2.7 billion for local assistance, $1.8 billion for capital design constraints, topographic challenges, climate-related outlay support, and about $1.4 billion for highway opera- issues, and the political arena within which a project must be tions and maintenance. The budget also provides $397 mil- designed and delivered. lion for Caltrans' mass transportation and rail program and Some districts are clustered and form consolidated regions $890 million for transportation planning and department for project delivery. For instance, the Central region includes administration. The balance of funding goes for program four districts that share a project delivery staff. This consoli- development, legal services, and other purposes (28). How- dation allows for greater efficiency and a regional approach to ever, it is estimated that California's unfunded transporta- project delivery. As one deputy director noted, "We are decen- tion needs are $160 billion. tralized [districts] into centralized regions" (30). An assessment of California's transportation trends reveals that infrastructure investments have not kept up with the increase in population or the VMT for both work-related com- Internal Reorganization mutes and non-work­related travel. According to the FHWA, almost half of California's urban highways are congested. This Caltrans does not claim to be an organization that is struc- fraction is 65 percent greater than the national average. It tured solely for the purpose of delivering projects. But the is expected that on-road VMT will increase to 475 billion organization has changed in the last decade so that greater by the year 2020. This is a 55 percent increase from the year efficiencies are realized through more streamlined processes. 2000 (26). Additionally, according to the 2007 Annual Mobil- An organization that allows for better communication among ity Report, Los Angeles ranks as the number one city in the its units and greater collaboration helps to achieve a higher entire nation for travel delay, excess fuel consumed, and con- quality product and quicker response times. gestion cost (29). A gradual reorganization at Caltrans has occurred, more for Caltrans progressively implements new strategies to achieve reasons of practicality. For instance, the Environmental Analy- their goals to realize their vision of a transportation system sis Division that used to be part of Planning and Modal Pro- that provides safety, mobility, and improved quality of life. grams was moved into Project Delivery. Also, local programs were separated out of the Design Division. Moving the development of project initiation documents Organizational Structure (PIDs) out of Project Delivery and putting them in the Plan- Caltrans has a strong work force of about 22,000 employees. ning and Modal Programs was another organizational change. The director, along with the chief deputy director, is responsi- A PID is one of the first steps that define a project before it ble for nine key programs and 12 districts. The key programs gets programmed. Like a mini-project report, it includes the include Project Delivery, Maintenance and Operations, Plan- project planning, scoping, and programming. It provides a ning and Modal Programs, Administrative and Information "clean start" to the project, as noted by one division chief.

OCR for page 30
32 Caltrans' capital program has grown significantly over During the 1990s project management strategies were fur- the last five years. Their staffing levels, however, have not ther developed through task forces, external peer reviews, proj- increased to respond to the growing programs. Caltrans has ect management re-engineering teams, training academies, maintained relatively the same number of employees over and reorganization plans that steered the focus of project chiefs the last 10 years. While other states have markedly reduced their on project delivery rather than functional activities. Five strate- numbers in response to reduced budgets, Caltrans remains gies were outlined in a 1994 Director's memo: steady in employment numbers. But Caltrans differs by a large margin when the level of outsourcing is compared. Similar 1. To fundamentally transform Caltrans from what it was to large- and mid-sized states such as Texas and Florida out- what it must be in order to serve the already changed needs source up to 70 percent and 80 percent of their workloads, of the people and business of California; respectively. Caltrans only outsources 10 percent of its work 2. To organize and manage by business process; and often only by function (e.g., construction inspection, 3. To reinforce and facilitate delegation of authority and environmental investigation/documentation, etc.) rather responsibility to the lowest practical level, and also to build than entire projects (12). Yet, under such a great demand in the mechanisms for accountability and assistance to en- to engineer complex projects and continuously meet the sure top performance; quota of delivering the capital program, how does Caltrans 4. To reduce the cost of doing business while maintaining mange to "crawl through the barbed wire," meeting the goal quality; and of delivering 100 percent of the Ready to Let projects? The 5. To focus on the customer--the people of California. answer lies in three key areas where Caltrans excels at accel- erating projects from conception to completion: (a) project This was a call for "Meeting the Challenge to Change" (32). management strategy, (b) NEPA delegation, and most impor- By the end of that year, Caltrans had already begun its trans- tant (c) performance measures. formation into an organization that could deliver projects more efficiently. Project Management Strategy Risk Management According to some Caltrans managers, the organizational structure may appear "stove-piped" and does not show the Many states perform a risk assessment at some phase of the strong, deliberate efforts toward developing a project man- project. Stakeholders, project sponsors, and DOTs need some agement strategy over the last 10 years. Caltrans has many assurance that the project is constructible, can meet the needs project management policies and procedures that emphasize for which it was intended, and can be built within the allo- project delivery from the start. The move toward a project cated budget and a reasonable time frame. Risk management management approach began in the middle to late 1980s but is an integral part of project management, yet Caltrans only was formalized in the early 1990s. However, the objective of adopted a risk management strategy for project delivery since having a project managed in an organized manner from its March 2004. inception to its completion was documented as early as 1976, Caltrans provides a risk management handbook for all as evidenced by the following note, "Develop Project Man- project managers. Large, complex projects benefit the most agement Control System (PMCS), a computerized system for from a risk management plan that identifies and quantifies managing and controlling highway projects of all sizes from all the potential risks and ways to mitigate or exploit them. the earliest planning phase to the completion of contract, data Successful project risk management requires a corporate cul- in PMCS stored by project." While in the 1970s the challenge ture that supports an open, honest, and realistic recognition of may have been to leap into the computerized era, the approach project risks and discussions of risk in an environment where toward a project management strategy that allowed for "man- there is no enforcement of bureaucratic hierarchy. Identify- aging and controlling" projects was just as important. (31) ing risks requires the judgment and expertise of informed A review of Caltrans' chronology of events discloses that individuals. However, risk management takes time and most much effort was spent in developing the project management project budgets don't allow for a formal risk management plan. philosophy from 1980 to 1989. A Project Management Imple- At Caltrans, risk management is performed on every proj- mentation Plan was developed and approved, and formal train- ect either through informal discussions or via a formal risk ing was provided, on core concepts of project management. register. Project Delivery headquarters in Sacramento encour- Still, comments provided by the Transportation Commission ages all districts and regions to actively incorporate risk man- Assembly noted that "Caltrans should look to other organi- agement principles into project delivery and provide support zations for new project management techniques to reduce for implementation of the risk management plan. In every project development and delivery lag times" (32). case, project managers are left to decide the level of risk assess-

OCR for page 30
33 ment that is required for a project. Typically, smaller, simpler uments. Since the program started, "Caltrans has decreased projects with very few community concerns may not even have the amount of time required for environmental document a risk management plan. Complex, large projects carry greater approvals. Draft review went from more than six months, to risk and a project manager may decide to have a full risk man- less than two months. That's a time savings of 69 percent on agement plan to manage crises and unforeseen events. In such draft review and 68 percent for final document review (from cases the risk management plan is implemented early on and 2.5 months to less than a month). These savings were achieved monitored throughout the life of the project. The end result after eliminating FHWA environmental document review is that project managers and sponsors can make informed and working directly with federal resource agencies to meet decisions regarding alternative approaches to achieving their their requirements" (23). objectives. Best Practices for California NEPA Delegation--Balancing Delivery Performance Measures with Stewardship For a number of reasons, many state DOTs are becoming Under the SAFETEA-LU bill that became law in August more focused on developing performance measures. Perfor- 2005, Caltrans now has the ability to streamline the federal mance measures allow for an inventory of the existing trans- environmental review process. It became the first of five portation system, address system conditions, communicate state transportation agencies to participate in the federal Sur- priorities to the public, help make informed decisions, and face Transportation Project Delivery Pilot Program or NEPA promote change. It is an evolving area that addresses many Delegation. Under the pilot program, the FHWA assigned to factors and provides numerous benefits. But for a state to Caltrans the U.S. Secretary of Transportation's responsibilities develop, experiment, and constantly refine the process takes for federal approvals under NEPA and other federal envi- many years and assertive determination to continuously want ronmental laws such as the Endangered Species Act and Sec- and expect more. Caltrans has managed to incorporate per- tion 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (23). formance measures into every aspect of delivering a project. Section 6004 and 6005 of the law allows Caltrans the oppor- The concept of a performance-based management pro- tunity to test and streamline the environmental process. As gram is interlaced with every aspect of the way Caltrans does of July 1, 2007, Caltrans assumed the FHWA environmen- business. It includes all levels of management and decision tal responsibilities under NEPA. This assignment includes all making, from the transportation commission to the director projects on the State Highway System and all local assistance to division managers all the way down to line employees. It projects off of the State Highway System within California. incorporates the strategic plan, the operations plan, and the FHWA responsibilities include environmental coordination actual performance measures. The extent of Caltrans' holis- and consultation under the federal environmental laws per- tic approach to project delivery can be appreciated only by taining to the review or approval of projects under the pilot understanding the agencies involved, Caltrans' move toward program (33). transparency, the level of commitment by Caltrans' managers, The goal for Caltrans is to simplify and expedite the project and the paradigm shift that has occurred since performance- delivery process. The NEPA process involves a strict adherence based management was implemented. to the standards that protect the environment. The Califor- nia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), passed in 1970 on Transportation Policy Players the heels of NEPA, imposes some requirements that are more stringent than the federal ones. For this reason, Caltrans was California transportation policy involves federal, state, well positioned to become a leader in expediting the environ- regional, and local entities. At the federal level, the U.S.DOT, mental review processes. the FHWA, and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) are The pilot program does not change federal environmental involved. At the state level, the California Legislature, Cal- protection standards. Caltrans' participation in the program trans, the California High-Speed Rail Authority (HSRA), shows California's continued leadership in environmental pro- and the California Transportation Commission (CTC) are tection and transportation project delivery. Implementation involved. The state has 26 Regional Transportation Planning of the pilot program was expected to simplify and expedite Agencies (RTPAs) that administer funds, allocate federal and the federal environmental review process for transportation local funds, and select projects for improvement at a regional projects, while ensuring the same level of protection for envi- level. Finally, the state's 18 MPOs are very involved with the ronmental resources. The program has some proven results planning and prioritizing of projects that are included in the and has benefited Caltrans with an overall time savings and Regional Transportation Plan. They plan and program proj- quicker delivery for producing approved environmental doc- ects in urbanized areas with populations over 50,000. Local

OCR for page 30
34 involvement includes cities, counties, and transit agencies such State Transportation Improvement Program, as Bay Area Rapid Transit and the Los Angeles County Metro- State Highway Operation and Protection Program, politan Transportation Authority (27). and Traffic Congestion Relief Program The RTPAs have an integral role in which capacity proj- ects are prioritized for design and construction within their Three components make up Caltrans' programs: the State purview. For instance, in the Bay area, the Metropolitan Trans- Transportation Improvement Program, the State Highway portation Commission (MTC) actually selects the projects Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP), and the Traffic and hands them over to the engineering firm, which may be Congestion Relief Program (TCRP). Funding is administered Caltrans, for concept development, design, permitting, and by the CTC. construction. The State Transportation Improvement Program is a five- year capital improvement plan that is updated every two years for transportation projects throughout the state. These projects Complete System Approach add capacity to the transportation system; funding dollars are Caltrans has built a pyramid upon which transportation distributed using a formula to regions and inter-regional areas. investments lead to significant improvements (Figure 3). It is The SHOPP is a four-year capital improvement plan that a performance-based, outcome-driven approach that can be is also updated every two years. This plan specifies projects applied to many transportation issues. For example, the strate- that provide rehabilitation, maintenance, and operational gies outlined in Figure 3 can be used to reduce congestion. Sys- improvements, including safety. Initially, the SHOPP begins tem monitoring and evaluation, and maintenance and preser- with a 10-year plan that contains a list of projects based on vation form the foundations upon which other strategies are need. This list is eventually pared down to a funded list of built. Operational improvements and system completion and projects which is finalized to become the four-year SHOPP expansion will provide the mobility benefits over the next plan. SHOPP projects have priority over the transportation decade (34). dollars and projects are funded based on a statewide need System Completion and Expansion Operational Improvements Intelligent Transportation Systems, Traveler Information/Traffic Control, Incident Management Smart Land Use Demand Management/Value Pricing Maintenance and Preservation System Monitoring and Evaluation Source: California Department of Transportation Figure 3. Complete system approach.

OCR for page 30
35 rather than a geographic formula. Funding for SHOPP comes · FY 2005­06: 99 percent "off the top" of the State Highway Account. · FY 2006­07: 100 percent The TCRP is also referred to as Proposition 42. Proposi- · FY 2007­08: 100 percent tion 42 is funded separately from the State Transportation Improvement Program. It amends the state constitution and As shown in the preceding list, once again, for the FY allows for a permanent dedication of the sales tax on motor 2007­2008 transportation program, Caltrans delivered 100 per- vehicle fuels to be allocated to transportation (27). cent of the 294 projects on the list (a total worth of $3.5 bil- lion) (34, 23). Toward Transparency--Changing This delivery translates to credibility and integrity in the the Political Mindset eyes of the public and their political leaders. In the political realm, credibility is critical. It takes a long time to build it, but Caltrans has set a clear direction for its future. The it can be lost instantly if inaccurate information is presented. 2007­2012 Strategic Plan highlights the goals and direc- The integrity of performance measures are key for an agency, tions that the organization wants to take. Each goal reflects because they provide internal guidance to ensure that the an area of improvement and is tied directly into perfor- agency is providing the optimum service for every tax dollar mance across the organization. This is an incredible attempt collected. to bring so many diverse operations, processes, programs and policies together to align toward a common vision. Caltrans identified five goals (34): Performance-Based, Outcome-Driven Results How does Caltrans accelerate the delivery of its projects · Safety--Provide the safest transportation system in the consistently and efficiently? In the early 1990s, Caltrans nation for users and workers. began with a system vision: "all forms of transportation in · Mobility--Maximize transportation system performance a unified, interconnected manner." There was also a "call for and accessibility. better management with an eye on performance" (34). Due · Delivery--Efficiently deliver quality transportation projects to an Executive Order, California's 1993 transportation plan and services. alludes to the development of appropriate transportation · Stewardship--Preserve and enhance California's resources system performance objectives and measures. California's and assets. system at that time was a set of interconnected parts that · Service--Promote quality service through an excellent lacked a standard management function to help understand workforce. the existing conditions and accomplishments and carve future Caltrans' third goal emphasizes its constant efforts to deliver targets. Caltrans needed a planning tool to improve investment quality transportation projects and services efficiently so that analysis while delivering a customer-oriented, as opposed to it can become transparent, i.e., accountable, to the user. a service provider-driven, program. Moving toward transparency has not always been easy A workshop held in Sacramento in 1997 served as the start- because changing the political mindset was necessary. The pub- ing point for the entire performance measure approach to be lic has not always understood the complexities of constructing examined, for eventual development into the performance a project, let alone having multiple stages of a project that won't management system that is in place today. Some of the key come together until it becomes a finished, usable product. Nor themes discussed at the workshop formed the foundation of have the political constituents always been privy to the difficult how performance measures would be developed, used, and project prioritization process that must occur annually. How- monitored. One key point raised was whether performance ever, the leadership of a very engaging director has allowed Cal- measures should be based on outcome or output. While trans to change the mindset of the public. It started with per- output-based measures relate to the agency's accomplish- formance measures and delivering on promises made. The goal ments (number of lane-miles added, improvements in level has been set at 100 percent delivery for projects on the Ready of service, etc.), outcome-based measures track the extent to Let list. After small gains, Caltrans has achieved a high suc- that the users of the system achieve their goals. Tracking cess rate in the last four years (23): mobility, reliability, and accessibility, for example, are ways of measuring outcome. However, outcome-based measures · FY 2001­02: 86 percent are difficult to devise and time consuming to document. · FY 2002­03: 85 percent These measures have to be relevant and useful, so that users · FY 2003­04: 87 percent can understand them and link them to the investment of their · FY 2004­05: 96 percent tax dollars in the transportation system.

OCR for page 30
36 Another key point is that performance measures should · Cost effectiveness--maximizing the current and future ben- be decision tools, not decision rules. Performance measures efits from public and private transportation investments do not replace politics, but rather "reassert a balance between · Sustainability--preserving the transportation system while political decision making and scientific and technical knowl- meeting the needs of the present without compromising edge" (35). They should help make better decisions overall, the ability of future generations to meet their own needs so that funding can be allocated appropriately and weaknesses · Environmental quality--helping to maintain and enhance in the transportation delivery system can be addressed so that the quality of the natural and human environment the system can improve holistically. · Safety and Security--minimizing the risk of death, injury, The dynamic process of implementing performance mea- or property loss sures successfully requires political buy-in. Political powers and · Equity--Fair distribution of benefits and burdens stakeholders are important opinion leaders, and they should · Customer satisfaction--providing transportation choices be involved in the process of developing indicators as well as that are convenient, affordable, and comfortable participating in the entire process of developing and imple- · Economic well-being--Contributing to economic growth menting performance measures. An inclusive and participa- tory approach is essential to gaining political acceptance (35). Once the outcomes were identified, the indicators had to be Users and customers also had to be included in the process determined. But these indicators had to be "mode neutral," in order for it to be responsive to their needs. User expecta- with each indicator considering all transportation modes tions vary with respect to mode, location of activities, pattern equally. Intermodal issues were prevalent to ensure that the of travel, and length of trips. Performance measures would measures developed were appropriate across all modes and therefore have to be sophisticated enough to account for this excluded mode-specific indicators. For an overarching trans- user variability and be capable of collecting and processing portation network, this would be difficult to accomplish. diverse information. Moreover, "there is an important link Among other issues was the fact that, while most trips were between the measurement of system performance, users' sat- found to occur intermodally, the transportation system is not isfaction with the performance of the system, and the policy managed intermodally (35). planning and funding process. Improvements in infrastruc- ture can only be attained if the funding priorities and plan- Building on Successes. Caltrans had already been using ning decisions genuinely reflect measures of performance basic forms of performance measures in its Maintenance and that are of interest to the system users" (35). Operations division and for congestion management. These served as a basis for developing the other areas of perfor- Criteria Challenges. The first step for Caltrans was to mance measures. Building on the successes of the established assess its multimodal system and develop a coordinated, measures allowed Caltrans to use the information and data cooperative process that would measure transportation system already available. Caltrans made a concerted effort to strike a performance throughout California and support informed balance between simplicity and comprehensiveness in devis- decisions by public officials, operators, service providers and ing its performance measures. system users. In the year 2000, Caltrans released the first prototype model The initial work plan included a review of existing perfor- for performance measures. This framework was not intended mance measure efforts, identifying system outcomes, devel- for the entire state; it dealt predominantly with urban areas oping indicators (measures) that correlate to outcomes, and because they experience the most congestion and challenges formulating an implementation scheme. Turning the work with mobility, delay times, and infrastructure deterioration. plan into a reality revealed a number of hurdles. Later on in the process, Caltrans developed performance mea- Caltrans worked through many challenges. The first was sures for rural areas as well. Using the framework and data identifying the outcomes that reflected Caltrans' vision. Nine available for the urban measures, and modifying them to suit outcomes were identified: mobility/accessibility, reliability, the unique scenarios encountered in rural counties, Caltrans cost effectiveness, sustainability, environmental quality, safety continues to build upon its successes. and security, equity, customer satisfaction, and economic well- Currently, Caltrans' performance measures represent a being. They are described in more detail as follows (35): keystone in the California Transportation Plan (CTP). The relationship between the CTP goals, performance measures/ · Mobility/accessibility--reaching desired destinations with outcomes, and indicators are shown in Table 2 (26). relative ease within a reasonable time, at a reasonable cost For most of the indicators, baselines already exist and annual with reasonable choices targets are set. At the end of the fiscal year, performance is · Reliability--providing reasonable and dependable levels of examined against the targets. If the targets are not met, the service by mode strategies are refined, interim benchmarks are reviewed and

OCR for page 30
37 Table 2. Relationship between CTP goals and transportation system performance measures/outcomes and key indicators. System Performance Key Indicators CTP Goals Measure/Outcomes (Data to Collect and Report on) Improve Mobility and Mobility/Reliability/ Travel Time (Mobility) Accessibility Accessibility · Travel time within key regional travel corridors Travel Delay (Mobility) · Total person (passenger) hours of delay. Percentage on-time performance travel (Reliability) · Percentage on-time performance in key corridors Coordinated Transportation Available Travel Choices (Accessibility) and Land Use (Key · List modes available in key corridors indicators are included and at key transportation centers under the Accessibility · Percentage of workers within x (15, 30, outcome.) 45, 60) minutes of their jobs Other additional measures · Modal Split (including choice ridership) under development. · Percentage of jobs within a quarter/half mile of a transit station or corridor · Percentage of population within one- quarter/half mile of transit station/stop or bus corridor Productivity Throughput--persons and vehicles (Productivity) · Percentage utilization during peak period (highway) · Passengers per vehicle revenue mile (transit) · Passengers per vehicle revenue hour (transit) · Passengers miles per train mile · Percentage trucks by axle Preserve the System Preservation Highways, Streets, and Roads Transportation System · Pavement--smoothness and distressed miles · Bridges--structurally deficient or functionally obsolete · Roadside Transit and Passenger Rail · Vehicle fleet age · Miles between service calls Aviation · General aviation runway pavement condition Support the Economy Economic Development Measures Under Development Return on Investment Enhance Public Safety and Safety Traveler Safety Security · Fatal/injury collisions and fatalities/injuries--rates and totals Reflect Community Values Equity Measures Under Development Enhance the Environment Environmental Quality Air Quality · Days exceeding national/state standards by region/air basin and statewide Noise · Number of residential units exposed to transportation-generated noise exceeding standards Energy Consumption · Fossil fuel use ratio to passenger miles traveled Others Under Development Source: California Department of Transportation, California Transportation Plan 2025